Intrarenal pressure and flow rate profile using LithoVue™ elite: impact of different irrigation systems and working channel instruments.

PURPOSE: To report real-time IRP and FR while performing flexible ureteroscopy in porcine kidney model utilizing LithoVue™ Elite (Boston Scientific®) with different irrigation systems, including automated pumps. METHODS: Using an ex-vivo model of porcine kidney, IRPs were measured with LithoVue Elite. Ureteroscopic settings (US) were tested with all permutations of irrigation methods (IM), working channel occupant (WCO), and ureteral access sheaths (UAS). IMs included: Single Action Pumping System (SAPS™, Boston Scientific), Thermedx FluidSmart™ (Stryker®), and ENDOMAT™ (Karl Storz®). Pumps were tested at 50, 100, and 150 mmHg. WCOs included a 1.9Fr zero-tip basket, 200 µm, and 365 µm laser fibers. UASs utilized 11/13Fr and 12/14Fr 36 cm. RESULTS: 84 different US were tested (252 experiments). ENDOMAT had higher IRP but the same FR as Thermedx at the same US for 50 and 100 mmHg (p < 0.01). SAPS had higher IRP and FR than pumps in all US studies (p < 0.01). There was positive correlation between pressure set by the pump and both IRP and FR (rho > 0.9). As the diameter of the WCO increased, lower IRP and FR were observed with the pumps (p < 0.01). With SAPS, IRP was similar regardless of WCO, but FR was decreased with the increased diameter of WCO (p = 0.81 and p < 0.01, respectively). There was significantly higher IRP when using 11/13Fr UAS than 12/14Fr (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: IRP was higher with SAPS than automated pumps. ENDOMAT showed higher IRP than Thermedx when under 150 mmHg. IRP and FR increase with higher pump pressure and decrease with larger diameter WCO. Likewise, a larger UAS significantly reduced IRP.

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser with MOSES technology is more efficient than thulium fibre laser in supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

OBJECTIVES: To address the paucity of literature comparing outcomes achieved with utilisation of the high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser with MOSES technology vs those achieved with the thulium fibre laser (TFL) in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing supine mini-PCNL between August 2021 and May 2023. Exclusion criteria were urinary diversion, simultaneous utilisation of >1 laser platform, use of any other form of fragmentation, and ureteric stones. The Ho:YAG platform (Lumenis Pulse P120H™ with MOSES technology, 120W; Boston Scientific®) and the TFL (Soltive SuperPulsed Thulium Fibre [SPTF], 60W; Olympus®) were compared. Data on stone-free rate (SFR) were determined by computed tomography performed on the first postoperative day and presented as absence of stone fragments, no fragments larger than 2 mm, or no fragments larger than 4 mm. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients met the inclusion criteria, 51 mini-PCNLs with the Ho:YAG laser and 49 with the SPTF laser. No significant differences in demographics or stone characteristics were detected between the two groups. The Ho:YAG laser utilised less energy and time, resulting in higher ablation efficiency (P < 0.05) and less total operating time (P < 0.05). Overall, there was no difference in SFR in any category between the Ho:YAG group and the SPTF group (no fragments: relative risk [RR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.12, P = 0.21; fragments <2 mm: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67-1.10, P = 0.23; fragments <4 mm: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80-1.15, P = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed an equivalent postoperative SFR, this study supports a shorter operating time and greater intra-operative laser efficiency with the Ho:YAG laser over the SPTF laser in mini-PCNL.